Venkateshbabu Nagendrababu1, Shaju Jacob Pulikkotil2, Omer Sheriff Sultan2, Jayakumar Jayaraman3, Ove A Peters4. 1. Division of Clinical Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Electronic address: venkateshbabu@imu.edu.my. 2. Division of Clinical Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 3. Division of Community and Children Oral Health, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 4. Department of Endodontics, University of the Pacific Arthur A. Dugoni School of Dentistry, San Francisco, California; The University of Queensland Dental School, UQ Oral Health Centre, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this systematic review (SR) was to evaluate the quality of SRs and meta-analyses (MAs) in endodontics. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify relevant articles in the electronic databases from January 2000 to June 2017. Two reviewers independently assessed the articles for eligibility and data extraction. SRs and MAs on interventional studies with a minimum of 2 therapeutic strategies in endodontics were included in this SR. Methodologic and reporting quality were assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), respectively. The interobserver reliability was calculated using the Cohen kappa statistic. Statistical analysis with the level of significance at P < .05 was performed using Kruskal-Wallis tests and simple linear regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 30 articles were selected for the current SR. Using AMSTAR, the item related to the scientific quality of studies used in conclusion was adhered by less than 40% of studies. Using PRISMA, 3 items were reported by less than 40% of studies, which were on objectives, protocol registration, and funding. No association was evident comparing the number of authors and country with quality. Statistical significance was observed when quality was compared among journals, with studies published as Cochrane reviews superior to those published in other journals. AMSTAR and PRISMA scores were significantly related. CONCLUSIONS: SRs in endodontics showed variability in both methodologic and reporting quality.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this systematic review (SR) was to evaluate the quality of SRs and meta-analyses (MAs) in endodontics. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify relevant articles in the electronic databases from January 2000 to June 2017. Two reviewers independently assessed the articles for eligibility and data extraction. SRs and MAs on interventional studies with a minimum of 2 therapeutic strategies in endodontics were included in this SR. Methodologic and reporting quality were assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), respectively. The interobserver reliability was calculated using the Cohen kappa statistic. Statistical analysis with the level of significance at P < .05 was performed using Kruskal-Wallis tests and simple linear regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 30 articles were selected for the current SR. Using AMSTAR, the item related to the scientific quality of studies used in conclusion was adhered by less than 40% of studies. Using PRISMA, 3 items were reported by less than 40% of studies, which were on objectives, protocol registration, and funding. No association was evident comparing the number of authors and country with quality. Statistical significance was observed when quality was compared among journals, with studies published as Cochrane reviews superior to those published in other journals. AMSTAR and PRISMA scores were significantly related. CONCLUSIONS: SRs in endodontics showed variability in both methodologic and reporting quality.